1 Profiling causative factors leading to construction project delays in the United Arab Emirates Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management Bekithemba Mpofu, Edward G. Ochieng, Adriaan Pretorius and Cletus Moobela Dr. Bekithemba Mpofu BSc MSc MBA PhD FCMI CBIFM Programme Leader MBA Construction & Real Estate The College of Estate Management, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AW, United Kingdom, Tel: +44(0)1189214762 Email: [email protected]Dr. Edward Ochieng Senior Lecturer in Programme and Project Management Cranfield School of Management Innovation and Process Management Cranfield University Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL Tel: +44 (0) 1234 753123 Email: [email protected]Dr. Cletus Moobela School of Civil Engineering and Surveying University of Portsmouth Portland Building, Portsmouth United Kingdom, PO1 3AH, UK Tel: +44(0)2392842143 Email: [email protected]Mr. Adriaan Pretorius BSc, MBA MBA Student The College of Estate Management Whiteknights, Reading RG6 6AW, United Kingdom,
39
Embed
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management · BSc MSc MBA PhD FCMI CBIFM Programme Leader MBA Construction & Real Estate The College of Estate Management, Whiteknights,
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Profiling causative factors leading to construction project delays in the United Arab
Emirates
Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management
Bekithemba Mpofu, Edward G. Ochieng, Adriaan Pretorius and Cletus Moobela
Dr. Bekithemba Mpofu BSc MSc MBA PhD FCMI CBIFM Programme Leader MBA Construction & Real Estate The College of Estate Management, Whiteknights, Reading, RG6 6AW, United Kingdom,
Tel: +44(0)1189214762 Email: [email protected] Dr. Edward Ochieng Senior Lecturer in Programme and Project Management Cranfield School of Management Innovation and Process Management Cranfield University Cranfield, Bedford MK43 0AL
Category 8: Problems of government and local authorities
There was general consensus between contractors and consultants that delay in obtaining building
permits and approvals from municipalities and different government departments was the most
significant cause of delay in this category (see Table 214). Overall this was the sixth most
important factor from all delay factors. This was followed in this category by routine procedures of
government departments.
Table 13: Problems of government and local authorities Insert Table 224
Based on Spearman’s correlation coefficient tests for government and local authorities related
factors, the relationship between all parties were found to be weak, with values close to zero.
Table 21: Spearman’s rank correlation for government and local authorities Insert Table 21
6. Discussion
This paper examined the attitudes and experiences of construction delay amongst clients and
senior construction practitioners in UAE. The findings from this study show that the construction
industry has always suffered from fragmentation owing to the temporary nature of project
execution (Sullivan and Harris, 1985). The effects of fragmentation can be mitigated, by adopting a
project strategy which will combine the skills of individuals and groups from contributing
organisations so as to have the best balance of resources available at the right time. In this study,
the following were identified as top construction delay variables in UAE:
Unrealistic contract duration imposed by client;
Incomplete design at the time of tender;
Too many scope changes and change orders;
20
Inadequate planning and scheduling (by contractors);
Poor project planning and control (by Project Managers);
Delay in obtaining permit/approval from municipality /different government. authorities;
Poor labour productivity problems;
Slowness in decision making process by owner;
Design changes; and
Inadequate site management, monitoring and control.
Under the category related to ‘Clients’, the most significant delay cause was “unrealistic contract
duration imposed by clients”. It was expressed that political expediency is often driving
unreasonable project timeframes, without consideration of how these projects will be resourced.
The second most important variable in this category was “too many scope changes and
variations”. As evidenced from the findings, change in scope was due to execution of incomplete
designs which leads to variations. Further, lack of proper scope definition creates a potential for
change or growth in scope during construction. This was followed by “slowness in decision making
process by clients”, and “late in revising and approving design documents” which was ranked third
and fourth in the category related to clients. This can be linked to excessive bureaucracy in client
organisations. Surprisingly, “delay in payment by the client” did not have any significant influence
on project delay.
In the category related to designers results indicated that the most significant factor in this category
was “incomplete design at time of tender”. The probable reason for this was poor design
management and unrealistic deadlines imposed by clients. Under the category related to ‘Project
Managers’, the most significant effect on project delay was “poor project planning and control”,
influenced by the consultants own perception. This interrelated with contractors and client’s opinion
that “inadequate duration of contract period”, as determined by the project manager as more
important. It can be indicative that the clients feel ill-advised on the contract durations proposed by
project managers. While the clients might impose unrealistic durations, it is also the project
manager duty to advise them correctly. Poor leadership was pointed out by the clients as a
concern, which is evident that clients are generally not happy with the way projects are managed.
Under the category related to ‘Contractors’, inadequate planning and scheduling was the main
cause for contractor’s delays. Commitment by contractors to enter into contracts with very tight
timeframes might be due to pressures from a competitive market, over optimism or inability to plan
properly during tender phase. The second most significant factor in this category was inadequate
site management, monitoring and control. These factors signified that the traditional way of
managing projects is not sufficient to cope with the pressures of complex and fast-track projects.
Under the category related to ‘Labour’, there was agreement between all parties that poor labour
21
productivity is the main issue of concern. Labourers are often paid low salaries and the weather
plays an important role on productivity outputs especially during summer months. Poor level of
supervision was also noted as a reason for low labour productivity. Similarly, severe overtime and
shifts, negatively affects productivity.
On the issue of ‘Finance’ related problems the most influential factor was financing difficulties of
contractors. This appeared to have no relation with late payment by clients and can be a symptom
of poor cash flow management. With relation to the category related to ‘Contractual matters’,
contract modifications was noted as the main contributor of delays. The contract is the main
mechanism for transferring risk, and it can be interpreted that unreasonable demands drives
contract modifications, due to disagreement. With regards to ‘Government and Local Authorities’,
there was general consensus between contractors and consultants that delay in obtaining building
permits and approvals was the most significant cause of delay in this category.
These results suggest that construction delays in UAE are project and operational related.
However, the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient tests were used to measure the degree of
agreement or disagreement between the parties. Based on the overall results there was a
moderate positive correlation between all parties. It was evident however that practitioners need to
change their existing practices in order to ensure timely delivery of projects. Continuous
coordination and relationship between practitioners are required through the project life cycle in
order to solve problems and develop project performance. Practitioners should endeavour to use
the already existing information in the public domain and develop means and ways of addressing
the problems faced by the industry. As it is a known fact that there is not a single system that
would work for all construction projects, adaptation of well aligned project tools and techniques is
essential. As evidenced in this study, construction projects in UAE require clients and senior
project practitioners with excellent coordination skills that are not limited to organising plant,
materials and work items but also the human resource, which to a greater extent, have a
significant impact on project outcomes.
It is recommended to develop human resources in the construction industry through proper and
continuous training programs. These programs can update their knowledge and can assist them to
be more familiar with project management techniques and processes. Parties must recognise the
advantage of collaboration and be open minded and willing to join the collaboration. Every party
must be aware that collaboration has a huge potential to minimize risks and maximize
opportunities. As affirmed by Flyvbjerg (2014), Ochieng and Price (2010) and Ochieng et al.
(2013c), a bad project with an excellent project team, has a higher chance of being completed on
time than a “good” contract executed by a “bad” team. An incentive system can help to build
strong, trustful, and sustainable relationships between the construction parties. A comparison of
22
the findings of this study against those of previous researchers on the subject suggested that there
were significant differences in factors causing construction project delays based on geographic,
cultural, and socio-economic factors. This accord with an earlier observation that construction
projects can be country-specific (Sambasivan and Soon, 2007). There also appears to be time
dimension to the relevance of such pieces of research because an earlier study by Faridi and El-
Sayegh (2006) on the UAE construction industry yielded fundamentally different results from what
this study has found out.
As demonstrated in the method section, the number of unit’s analysis in this study was dictated by
the type of research problem. According to Creswell (2003), if the sample size is too small, it
becomes difficult to find significant relationships from the data, as statistical tests normally require
larger sample size to ensure representative distribution of the population and to be considered
representative of groups of people to whom results will be generalised or transferred. As
articulated in Faridi et al. (2006) study, the questionnaire forms were distributed to 400 randomly
selected construction professionals. A total of 105 responses were received, thus a response rate
of 27 per cent was received. In this study, the population consisted of approximately 500
experienced stakeholders (clients, consultants and contractors). A total of 208 responses were
received, giving a response rate of 42 percent. In addition, a number of statistical techniques were
used to analyse the data collected from the participants. The first was the reliability using
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The Cronbach’s coefficient test was used to test the reliability of the
5-point Likert scale for all variables under each category. Faridi et al. (2006), fails to address this
specific issue. The second one was Relative Importance Index (RII) to measure the level of
importance of variables indicated by respondents. Relative Importance Index (RII) was used to
measure the level of importance of categories and variables. In the previous study, Relative
Importance Index (RII) was used to analyse causes of delay, ranking was based on contractors
and consultants.
7. Conclusion
The present study was designed to identify the most significant causes of delays in the UAE
construction industry. The study has unveiled a number of important causes of construction delays
in the UAE, ranging from unrealistic contract durations to poor labour productivity, with consultants
and clients seemingly shouldering the bulk of the ‘blame game’. It was evident however that all the
three main stakeholders in a construction project (clients, consultants and contractors) need to
change their existing practices in order to ensure timely delivery of projects. A comparison against
previous international literatures on project delays was conducted in an attempt to determine
differences in causes based on geographic, cultural and socio-economic factors. The causative
factors of project delays obtained through survey were compared against the top-five important
factors from previous studies (see Table 2). The research confirms that delays are country specific
23
and appear to be time related hence they should be viewed within the social, economic and
cultural settings of the United Arab Emirates. The results are not fully comparable to any of the
studies which support Sambasivan and Soon (2007) findings that “the effects of delays in
construction projects can be country-specific”. Further, it also appear to be time related since an
earlier study by Faridi et al. (2006) on the UAE, is significantly different. In order to successfully
address issues of project delays, the casual factors need to be clearly understood at the planning
phase. There are a number of important changes which need to be made in UAE. Methods should
be put in place to reduce long and bureaucratic processes within the client’s organisations, not
only to fulfil the requirements of the contract but also to suit fast-track projects.
Mechanisms should be in place to reduce mistakes and discrepancies in design documents. There
is a need for more team building, knowledge exchange and a greater integration of skills
particularly at the early stages of planning a project and developing its design. Inadequate project
management expertise by project managers may prove to be a recipe for unsuccessful projects.
There is need to ensure that personnel or consultants managing construction projects have the
necessary training in construction project management. During tendering it is advised that
contractors engage experienced members within their organisation from the production side, such
as project managers, site agents, engineers, etc. to establish an adequate programme and
resource allocation for the fulfilment of the project. Considerably more work will need to be done to
propose a performance measurement framework which would allow practitioners in UAE to
benchmark their construction processes.
The findings of this study have a number of important implications for future practice. To avoid
delay in reviewing and approving design documents, methods should be put in place to reduce
long and bureaucratic processes within the client’s organization. In addition, construction clients
should hire specialist’s contractors with whom they have a good relationship. From a designer
standpoint, there is a need for more team building, knowledge exchange and a greater integration
of skills particularly at the development phase of construction projects. In order to enhance project
performance, continuous coordination and relationship between client, project manager and
specialists contractors are required throughout the project life cycle. As demonstrated in this study,
the construction industry has always suffered from fragmentation owing to the temporary nature of
project execution. The effects of fragmentation can be mitigated, by adopting a project strategy
which will amalgamate the skills of specialist’s contractors from contributing organisations. The
project manager should also ensure that there is adequate construction time and sufficient float
that has been built into the programme so that when delays do occur, they are absorbed into the
contract and are less likely to become critical. It is suggested that construction project managers
should utilise flexible programmes and focus more on project objectives to be achieved.
24
There are some issues that were not covered in-depth but have been identified as themes for
subsequent research. These issues have been outlined as very specific recommendations for
further research. There is a need for the construction industry in UAE to develop further its
understanding of project complexity at different levels (strategic, operational and project). This calls
for comprehensive research into the application of value enhancing practices. Although there has
been significant research into operational efficiency in Western economies, there has been little
done to address this theme in developing countries. This highlights the need for research work
examining how operational efficiency can be achieved on construction projects in UAE. A major
limitation of the current study was the use of a single approach to facilitate data collection. As
suggested by Creswell (2003) studies that use a mixed method are more reliable because they
engage triangulation.
References
Abdel-Wahab, M. S., Dainty, A. R. J., Ison, S. G., Bowen P, and Hazlehurst, G. (2008). Trends of
skills and productivity in UK construction Industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 15(4), 372-382.
Abdul-Rahman, H., Berawi, M. A., Berawi, A. R., Mohamed, O., Othman, M., and Yahya, I. A,
(2006). Delay mitigation in the Malaysian construction industry. Journal of Construction
Engineering Management, 132(2), 125-133.
Acharya, N. K, Lee, Y. D, and Im, H. M, (2006). Conflicting factors in construction project: Korean
perspective. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 13(6), 543-566.
Ahmed, S. M., Azhar, S., Kappagantula, P. and Gollapudi, D. (2003). “Delays in construction: A
brief study of the Florida construction industry.” Proceeding of the 39th Annual ASC Conference,
Clemson University, Clemson, SC, 257-266.
Al-Aghbari, W. A. M. (2005). Factors affecting construction speed of industrialised building systems
in Malaysia. Master’s thesis, University Putra Malaysia.
Al-Kharashi, A. and Skitmore, M. (2008). Causes of delays in Saudi Arabian public sector
construction projects. Construction Management and Economics, 27(1), 3-23.
Alwi, S. and Hampton, K. (2003). “Identifying important factors causes of delays in building
construction projects.” The 9th East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering and
Construction, Bali, Indonesia.
Andi, T. and Minato, T. (2003). Representing Causal Mechanism of Defective Designs: A System
Approach Considering Human Errors. Construction Management and Economics, 21(3), 297-305.
Arditi, R. D, Akan, G. T. and Gurdamar, S. (1985). Reasons for delays in public projects in Turkey.
Construction Management and Economics, 3(2), 171-181.
25
Assaf, S. A., Al-Khalil, M. and Al-Hazmi, M. (1995). Causes of delay in large building construction
projects. Journal of Management in Engineering, 11(2), 45-50.
Assaf, S. A and Al-Hejji, S. (2006). Causes of delay in large building construction projects.
International Journal of Project Management, 24(4), 349-357.
Ayudhya, B.I.N. (2011). Evaluation of common delay causes of construction projects in Singapore. Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, 5(11), 1027-1034.
Belout, A. and Gauvreau, C. (2004). Factors influencing project success: The impact of human
resource management. International Journal of Project Management, 22(1), 1-11.
Blismas, N. G, Sher, W. D, Thorpe, A. and Baldwin, A. N. (2004). Factors nfluencing project
delivery within construction clients multi-project environments. Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management, 11(2), 113-125.
Business Monitor International (BMI 2013). UAE construction industry valued at $41bn in 2013.
Business Round Table, (1991). Scheduled overtime effect on construction projects. Construction
Industry Cost Effectiveness Report C-2, New York.
Chan, W. M. C. and Kumaraswamy, M. M. (2002). Compressing construction durations: lessons learned from Hong Kong building projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20(1), 23-35.
Chan, A. P. C, Scott D, and Chan, A. P. L, (2004). Factors affecting the success of a construction
project. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(1), 153-155.
CIDB (1992). Raising Singapore’s Construction Productivity CIDB Construction Productivity Taskforce Report, Construction Industry Development Board, Singapore.
Couto, J. P. and Teixeira, J. C. (2007). “The evaluation of the delays in the Portuguese
construction.” CIB World Building Congress.
Cox. A. and Townsend. M (1997). Latham as half way house: A relational competence approach to
better practice in construction procurement. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 4(2), 143-158.
Creswell, J. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3),
297-334.
Dai. J, Goodrum, P. M, and Maloney, W. (2007). Analysis of Craft Workers’ and Foremen’s
perceptions of the Factors Affecting Construction Labour Productivity. Construction Management
Danso, H. and Antwi, J. K. (2012). Evaluation of the factors influencing time and cost overruns in
telecom tower construction in Ghana. International Institute for Science, Technology & Education
(IISTE), Civil and Environmental Research, 2(6), 2012.
Dawnays Ltd v F G Minter Ltd. (1971). 2 All ER 1389.
Delamont, S. Atkinson, P. and Parry, O. (1997). Supervising the PhD: A Guide to Success, The
Society for Research into Higher Education, Open University Press, Maidenhead.
Dowdy, S. and Wearden, S. (1985). Statistics for research. 2nd Ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Eldin, N. N. (1999). Impact of employee management and process issues on constructability implementation. Construction Management and Economics, 17 (6), 711-720.
Elgohary M, Fairclough. N and Ricciuti, R (2003). Constructability – from Qinshan to the ACR. Nuclear Plant Journal, 21(5), 31-35.
Faniran, O. O, Oluwoye, J. O, and Lenard, D. (1994). Effective construction planning, Construction
Management and Economics, 12(6), 485-499.
Faridi, A. S and El-Sayegh, S. M. (2006). Significant factors causing delay in the UAE construction
industry. Construction Management and Economics, 24(11), 1167-1176.
Fatoye, E. O. (2012). “Contributing factors of delay in the Nigerian construction industry: A
comparative analysis with other selected countries.” Procs 4th West Africa Built Environment
Research (WABER) Conference, 24-36 July 2012, Abuja, Nigeria, 575-587.
Flanagan, R., Norman, G., Ireland, V., and Ormerod, R., (1986). A fresh Look at the UK and US
construction industry building employer’s confederation, UK, London.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project
Management Journal, 45(2), 6-19.
Francis, V. E., Mehrtens, V. M., Sidwell, A, C. and McGeorge, W.D. (1999). Constructability
strategy for Improved project performance. Architectural Science Review, 42, 133-138.
Frimpong, Y., Oluwoye, J. and Crawford, L. (2003). Causes of delay and cost overruns in construction of groundwater projects in developing countries: Ghana as a case study. International Journal of Project Management, 21 (5), 321-326.
Fugar, F. D. K, and Agyakwah-Baah, A. B. (2010). Delays in building construction projects in
Ghana. Australasian Journal of Construction Economics and Building, 10(1/2), 128-141.
Gill, J. and Johnson, P. (2002). Research methods for managers. 3rd Edn. Sage Publications. London.
Gould, F. and Joyce, N. (2009). Construction Project Management. (3rd Ed). Pearson, Prentice
Hall, New Jersey, USA..
Groak, S. (1994). Is construction an Industry? Notes towards a greater analytic emphasis on external linkages. Construction Management and Economics, 12, 287-293.
27
Hester, W. T, Kuprenas, J. A. and Chang, T. C, (1991). Construction Changes and Change
Orders: Their Magnitude and Impacts. University of California, Berkeley,.
Holt, G. D. (2013). Asking questions, analysing answers: Relative importance revisited. Construction innovation, 14(1), 2-16.
Hsieh, T., Lu, S., and Wu, C. (2004). Statistical ananlysis of causes for change orders to
metropolitan public works. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 679-686.
Kazaz, A. and Ulubeylis, S. (2003). A different approach to construction labour in Turkey:
Comparative productivity analysis. Building and Environment, 39(1), 93-100.
Knight, A. and Ruddock, L. (2009). Advanced research methods in the built environment, Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell Publisher.
Kline, P. (1999). The handbook of psychological testing. (2nd Ed.). Routledge, London.
Latham, M. (1994). Constructing the Team, HMSO, London, 87-92.
Laufer, A., Howell, G. A. and Rosenfeld, Y. (1992). Three modes of short-term construction
planning. Construction Management and Economics, 10(3), 249-262.
Le-Hoai, L., Lee, Y. D. and Lee, J. Y. (2008). Delay and cost overruns in Vietnam large
construction projects: A comparison with other selected countries. Korean Society of Civil
Engineers (KSCE) Journal of Civil Engineering, 12(6), 367-377.
Lim, E. H. and Ling, F.Y.Y. (2002). Model for predicting clients contribution to project success.
Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 9, 388-395.
Long, N. D., Ogunlana. S., Quang. T. and Lam. K. C. (2004). Large construction projects in developing countries: a case study from Vietnam. International Journal of Project Management, 22 (7), 553-561.
Loosemore. M., Hall, C. and Dainty, A. R. J. (1996). “Excitement, innovation and courage in construction management research – Challenging historical values.” in Thorpe, A. (Ed.) Proceedings of the 12th Annual ARCOM Conference, Sheffield Hallam, 418–427.
Low, S. P. and Abeyegoonasekera, B. (2001). Integrating Buildability in ISO 9000 Quality Management Systems: Case Study of a Condominium Project. Building and Environment, 36(3), 299-312.
Love, P., Wang, X., Sing, C. and Tiong, R. (2013). Determining the probability of project cost
overruns. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 139 (3), 321–330.
Marzouk, M.M. and El-Rasas, T. (2014). Analysing delay causes in Egyptian construction projects. Journal of Advanced Research, 5 (1), 49-55.
Ochieng, E. G. and Price, A. D. F. (2009). Framework for managing multicultural project teams. Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 16 (6), 527-543.
28
Ochieng, E. G. and Price, A. D. F. (2010). Managing cross-cultural communication in multicultural construction project teams: The case of Kenya and UK. International Journal of Project Management, 28 (5), 449-460.
Ochieng, E. G., Price, A. D. F and Moore, D. (2013a). Management of Global Construction
Projects. Palgrave Macmillan’s Global Academic, Hampshire, UK.
Ochieng, E. G., Price, A. D. F., Ruan, X., Melaine, Y. and Egbu, C. (2013b).The impact of cross-cultural factors on heavy engineering projects: Case Kenya and UK. International Journal of Information Technology and Management, 4 (3), 1-21. Ochieng, E. G., Price, A. D. F., Ruan, X., Egbu, C. O. and Moore, D. (2013c). The effect of
uncertainty and complexity within multicultural construction teams. Engineering Construction and
Architectural Management, 20 (3), 307-324.
O’Connor, J. T, and Yang L, (2004). Project performance versus Use of technologies at project
and phase levels. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(3), 322-329.
Oglesby, C. H. (1989). Productivity Improvement in Construction, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Oyedele, L. O. and Tham, K. W. (2006). Clients’ assessment of architects’ performance in building
delivery process: Evidence from Nigeria. Building and Environment, 42(5), 2090-2099.
Phua, F. T. T. (2005). Determining the relationship between fee structure and project performance
between firms: An empirical study based on institutional and task environment perspectives.
Construction Management and Economics, 23(1), 45-56.
Pongpeng, J. and Liston, J. (2003). Contractor ability criteria: A review from the Thai construction
industry. Construction Management and Economics, 21(3), 267-282.
Proverbs, D. G. and Holt, G. D. (2000). A theoretical model for optimum project (time) performance
based on European best practice. Construction Management and Economics, 18(6), 657-665.
Rahman, I. A., Memon, A. H. , Azis, A. A. and Abdullah, N. H. (2013). Modelling causes of cost
overrun in large construction projects with partial least square-SEM approach: Contractor’s
perspective. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 5(6), 1963-
1972.
.
Ren, Z., Atout, M. and Jones, J. (2008). “Root causes of construction project delays in Dubai.”
Dainty, A (Ed) Procs 24th Annual ARCOM Conference, 1-3 September 2008, Cardiff, UK,
Association of Researchers in Construction Management, 2, 749-757.
Sambasivan, M. and Soon, Y. W. (2007). Causes and effects of delays in Malaysian construction
industry. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 665-674.
Santoso, D. S., Ogunlana S. O., and Minato, T. (2003). Assessment of risks in high rise building
construction in Jakarta. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10(1), 43-55.
29
Sekran, U. (1992). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Shebob, A., Dawood, N., Shah, R. K., & Xu, Q. (2012). Comparative study of delay factors in
Libyan and the UK construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural
Management, 19(6), 688–712.
Smith, T. E. (1999). “Collaborative Effort in Enhancing Building Quality.” Housing Conference:
Better Homes in the Next Millennium. Hong Kong, 24-25 November.
Speaight, A. (2010). Legal Handbook: The Law for Architects. 10th Ed. Elsevier Limited, Oxford, UK.
Sullivan, A. and Harris, F. C, (1985). Delays on large construction projects, University of
Technology, Loughborough, UK.
Sweis, G.J. (2013). Factors affecting time overruns in public construction projects: The case of Jordan. International Journal of Business Management, 8 (23), 120-129.
Tam, C. M. Tong, T. K. L., Leung, A. W. T and Chiu, G. W. C. (2002). Site layout planning using
non-structural fuzzy decision support system. Journal of Construction, Engineering and
Management, 128(3), 220-231.
Tam, C.M., Zeng, S. X. and Deng, Z. M., (2004). Identifying elements of poor construction safety management in China. Safety Science, 42, 569–586.
Toor, S. and Ogunlana, S. (2008). Problems causing delays in major construction projects in
Thailand. Construction Management and Economics, 26(4), 395-408.
Trigunarsyah, B. (2004). A review of current practice in constructability improvement: Case studies on construction projects in Indonesia. Construction Management and Economics, 22 (6), 567-580.
Tumi, S., Omran, A. and Pakir, A. (2009). “Causes of delay in construction industry in Libya.” The
International Conference on Economics and Administration, Faculty of Administration and
Business, University of Bucharest, Romania ICEA – FAA Bucharest, 14-15th November 2009.
Walker, D. H. T. and Shen, Y. J. (2002). Project understanding, planning, flexibility of management
action and construction time performance: two Australian case studies, Construction Management
and Economics, 20(1), 31–44.
Wiguna, I. P. A, and Scott, S., (2005). “Analysing the risks affecting construction delay and cost
overruns in Indonesia building projects.” 3rd International Conference on Innovation in Architecture,
Engineering and Construction, 3, Rotterdam. 841-849.
Winter, J. and Johnson, P. (2000). Resolving complex delay claims. A report on a meeting of the
UK Society of Construction Law, at the National Liberal Club, Whitehall Place, London.
Wong, F. W. H., Lam, P. T. I., Chan, A. P. C., and Chan, E. H. W. (2006). A review of buildability performance in Hong Kong and strategies for improvement. Surveying and Built Environment, 17(2): 37-48.
30
Wong, K. and Vimonsatit, V. (2012). A study of the factors affecting construction time in Western Australia. Scientific Research and Essays, 7 (4), 3390-3398. Zack, J. G, (1997). Claims prevention: Offence verses Defence. Journal of Cost Engineering,
39(7), 23-28
31
Figure
Figure 1: Project influence of expenditure
32
Tables Table 1: Benefits associated with improved buildability
Benefits of improved buildability References
Time Early completion of projects Francis et al. (1999), Low and Abeyegoonasekera (2001), Elgohary et al., (2003)
Cost Safe project cost / achieved cost effectiveness for project/ Reduce extra cost of change orders / Reduce cost of construction bids
Francis et al. (1999), Low and Abeyegoonasekera (2001), Elgohary et al., (2003)
Quality Improved quality performance of projects Francis et al. (1999), Low and Abeyegoonasekera (2001), Elgohary et al (2003), Trigunarsyah (2004)
Safety Improved safety performance of projects Francis et al. (1999), Low and Abeyegoonasekera (2001) , Trigunarsyah (2004)
Others Higher productivity levels / Reducing the risks of unforeseen problems / Improved industrial relations / Better teamwork / Improved communication / Enhanced client and customer satisfaction / Better resource utilization and overhead savings / Reduced project risks / Better working relationships
Eldin (1999), Francis et al. (1999), Low and Abeyegoonasekera (2001), Elgohary et al (2003), Trigunarsyah (2004)
Table 2: Summary of delay factors in construction projects
Related Factors (Groups)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
No Reference
Pro
ble
ms o
f clie
nt
Pro
ble
ms o
f desig
ners
Pro
ble
ms o
f P
M
Pro
ble
ms o
f contr
acto
r
Pro
ble
ms o
f la
bour
Pro
ble
ms o
f fin
ance
Pro
ble
ms o
f contr
act
Pro
ble
ms o
f com
munic
atio
n &
in
form
atio
n
Pro
ble
ms o
f site a
nd e
nvironm
ent
Pro
ble
ms d
ue to o
ther
facto
rs
Pro
ble
ms w
ith G
overn
me
nt /
Local A
uth
oritie
s
To
tal N
o.
of F
acto
rs
1 Arditi, Akan and Gurdamar (1985) 5 2 0 4 1 1 1 0 3 2 5 24
Table 3: Methods adopted for the analysis of construction project delays in other countries
Reference Method of Analysis Place studied
Arditi et al., (1985) Average Relative weights Turkey
Sullivan and Harris (1985) Frequency of Occurrence UK
Alwi and Hampton (2003) Importance Index Indonesia
Assaf and Al-Hejji Sadiq (2005) Importance Index Saudi Arabia
Faridi and El-Sayegh (2006) Relative Importance Index (RII) Dubai (UAE)
Couto and Teixeira (2007) Mean Value Portugal
Al-Kharashi and Skitmore (2008) ANOVA Saudi Arabia
Le-Hoai et al. (2008) Importance Index Vietnam
Toor and Ogunlana (2008) ANOVA Thailand
Ren et al., (2008) Severity weight method Dubai (UAE)
Tumi et al., (2009) Mean Value Libya
Ayudhya (2011) Severity Index Singapore
Fugar and Agyakwah-Baah (2010) Relative Importance Index (RII) Ghana
Danso and Antwi (2012) Relative Importance Index (RII) Ghana
Fatoye (2012) Relative Importance Index (RII) Nigeria
Marzouk and El-Rasas (2012) Importance Index Egypt
Wong and Vimonsatit (2012) Relative Importance Index (RII) Australia
Rahman et al. (2013) PLS-SEM Malaysia
Sweis (2013) Severity Index Jordan
Table 4:Target group from United Arab Emirates
Participants Sector Projects involved with
Number of years worked in the sector
Years involved in managing
construction projects in UAE
General managers Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Site project managers Construction Construction 1-5 years; 11-15 1-5 years; 11-15 years;
34
projects years; 16-20 years 16-20 years
Quantity surveyors Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Cost consultants Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Planners Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Engineers Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Construction managers Construction Construction projects
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
1-5 years; 11-15 years; 16-20 years
Table 5: Cronbach’s coefficient α values for all factor categories
Factor Category Cronbach’s α
1. Factors related to clients 0.86 2. Factors related to designers 0.80 3. Factors related to project managers 0.84 4. Factors related to contractors 0.85 5. Labour related labour 0.77 6. Problems of finance 0.68 7. Factors related to contractual matters 0.83 8. Problems of communication and information 0.88 9. Problems of site and environment 0.82 10. Problems of government and local authorities 0.87 11. Other factors 0.79
Table 6 – Ranking of causes (based on overall) Ref Delay Cause Contractors Consultants Clients Overall